Note: I've seen this question asked sometimes before (a, b, c), but neither of these was in C#, nor helpful.
Assume I'm using the ? :
ternary operator like this (to do nothing when false
is the case):
r==5? r=0 : <nothing> ;
I'm getting an error. Putting something there will obviously solve the problem. How can I still keep the other side empty without making some random empty function?
You can't. The whole point of the conditional ?: operator is that it evaluates an expression. You can't even just use:
Foo() ? Bar() : Baz();
... because that isn't a statement. You have to do something with the result... just like when you access a property, for example.
If you want to only execute a piece of code when a specific condition is met, the ?: operator isn't what you want - you want an if
statement:
if (foo)
{
bar();
}
It's as simple as that. Don't try to twist the conditional operator into something it's not meant to be.
Why would you want to use a ternary when you obviously need two parameters? You can simply use an if statement:
if(Condition())Action();
The other answers are correct, but they miss out a key point which I think is the main thing you're having an issue with. The thing to notice is that
r = 0
apart from assigning r
a value, returns the same value too. You can think of it like a function. You can call a function, which maybe does some other stuff apart from returning a value, which you may or may not put into use.
Take for example:
int square(int n)
{
// Now you can do other things here too. Maybe you do something with the UI in here:
Console.WriteLine("Calculating...");
// ^ Now thing of the above code as assigning a value to a variable.
return n * n;
// But after assigning the value, it also returns the value...
}
So, now suppose you may have two usage cases:
var x = square(2);
// -- OR --
square(2);
Note that both statements output 'Calculating...' but the former assigns a value of 2 * 2
or 4
to x
.
Even better, let's say we have a function:
int AssignValueToVariable(out int variable, int value)
{
variable = value;
return value;
}
Now the function is obviously redundant, but let's suppose we can use it for better understanding. Assume that it is equivalent to the assignment =
operator.
That said, we can come back to our scenario. The ternary operator <condition> ? <true expression> : <false expression>
takes in two expressions to return on the basis of a specified condition. So, when you write:
r == 5 ? r = 0 : r = 2; // Let's suppose the third operand to be r = 2
it is equivalent to:
r == 5 ? AssignValueToVariable(r, 0) : AssignValueToVariable(r, 2)
both of which are essentially:
r == 5 ? 0 : 2
That brings back the hard and fast rule that the operands must be expressions as the entire thing must boil down to an expression. So, you can get a kind of 'nothing' equivalent for an expression by using its default value.
Or, as the other answers mention, use an if
statement, straight and simple:
if (r == 5)
r = 0;
Extrapolating from the code you provided, I'd guess you're doing something with the evaluated expression. You can store the value in a separate variable result
and do whatever with it:
int result;
if (r == 5)
result = r = 0; // This sets the value of both result and r to 0
Now, you can substitute result
for your previous expression you wanted, i.e., r == 5 ? r = 0 : <nothing> // Pseudo-code
.
Hope it helps :)
You can now achieve this using the Discard operator, if you really want to.
public class Program
{
public static void Main()
{
int r=5;
_ = r==5 ? r=0 : 0;
Console.WriteLine($"{r}");
// outputs 0
}
}
You can now also do
_=Foo() ? Bar() : Baz();
As long as Bar and Baz return the same or convertible type.
I can suggest an extension method like this:
public static T ChangeOn<T>(this T variable, bool condition, T newValue)
{
return condition ? newValue : variable;
}
And use it like this:
var result = r.ChangeOn(r == 5, 0);
//or: r = r.ChangeOn(r == 5, 0); for self change
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41146905/do-nothing-when-other-side-of-ternary-operator-is-reached